OUR OPINION: State should tax medical marijuana

While Massachusetts sales tax doesn’t apply to prescription medications, medical marijuana is neither a medicine nor is it a prescription.

The Patriot Ledger and The Enterprise

We understand that the knee-jerk reaction from many quarters to Milton state Sen. Brian Joyce’s efforts to tax medical marijuana will be to slam the effort as just another money grab from the tax and spend liberals on Beacon Hill.

Some might think it’s unconscionable to tax – to the tune of $6.5 million in the first year – what they believe to be a type of medicine. Others might say it’s a way to drive up the costs of medical marijuana to the point where it becomes unaffordable and drive dispensaries out of business.

It’s none of these things.

While Massachusetts’ sales tax doesn’t apply to prescription medications, medical marijuana is neither a medicine nor a prescription. It can’t be bought at a pharmacy, and the state and health insurance won’t cover it. Marijuana has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration to treat any medical condition, and those who will be authorized under state law to use it – to smoke, vape or eat it in a brownie – will be given registration cards, not prescriptions. Possession and distribution of marijuana is still a federal offense. It’s classified as a Schedule 1 drug, and federal law supersedes state law. So it’s not about creating a tax but maintaining consistency.

Joyce’s office says that of the 22 states that have legalized medical marijuana, 20 tax it. Joyce’s spokesman, Jack Cardinal, said that Illinois doesn’t and Vermont is undecided.

Most important, the state needs the revenue.

Joyce, who chairs the Senate Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets, and more important to this topic, is vice chair of the Joint Committee on Health Care Financing, understands why the sales tax is necessary: his proposal would direct all revenue to fund drug treatment and addiction services.

Joyce believes marijuana is a gateway drug, that those who use it are at higher risk of trying and becoming addicted to stronger drugs, such as opioids. He’s not alone. Many medical professionals, addiction counselors and law enforcement officials – in other words, those on the front lines of the drug epidemic – agree with that assertion.

What’s certain is that the Senate’s recent passage of “An Act to Increase Opportunities for Long-Term Substance Abuse Recovery” will need to be funded. It would strengthen the Prescription Monitoring Program and, hopefully, facilitate the opening of many more in-state drug treatment facilities. We need them. Too many people are dying from the addiction epidemic.

“We have a crisis in Massachusetts,” said Joyce. “In March, we had 125 children born with opiate addictions.”

Opponents of Joyce’s proposed amendment to the Senate budget, which will likely be voted on next week, say adding the sales tax to the cost of the now 20 and soon 35 or more pot shops’ products will price out consumers. Not likely. It’s the same percentage of sales tax consumers pay for all other applicable goods: 6.25 percent.

If that proves too much, perhaps some of the dispensary nonprofits can earn down their projected millions in revenues.

Joyce is right to institute the tax now rather than battle to retroactively apply it. We urge the Legislature to support his amendment.

Here's our opinion. What's yours? Click here to write a letter to the editor or leave a comment on the story. Read more columns, editorials and letters